Traveller 5E
- Thread starter Sigtrygg
- Start date
WHULorigan
Emperor Mongoose
Will a Solomani Druid be able to morph into a Vargr . . .
It's called a werewolf . . .
Amazing how those subcultures still seem to endure in pockets in the underground and barren backwoods areas . . .
GrognardJeff
Mongoose
It would be good to make the mechanics especially of world, vehicle and ship building as compatible as possible with Mongoose Traveller. Keep the tech levels the same for example and the Universal World Profile. Is it going to have its own area of the known universe or be totally independent? The region coreward of the Imperium that use to be part of the Vilani Empire but was not made part of the Third Imperium is a possible area.
shirgall
Cosmic Mongoose
Besides Star Frontiers you mean.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Will a Solomani Druid be able to morph into a Vargr or Aslan?
Is there one, or more moons, in orbit?
That might trigger a mutation.
Or, cancer, that regresses when not under additional gravitational influence.
Fluffy Bunny Feet
Emperor Mongoose
There was a collection of short stories titled something like "Tomorrow Bites" (there was a companion Tomorrow Sucks") that was a collection of SciFi werewolf stories. In one the 1st human stardrive has radiation that activates latent genes making people werewolves. Systems are put in place to detect them and kill them. A more advanced drive is developed that is weaker at activating but it still happens.
In a non Traveller universe you might use such a story line.
Talon Greyfeather
Banded Mongoose
Sure glad you know more about what I believe that I do! Let the tutting resume!
I never said anything about removing tech or options to create balance. I said that not all tech and options belong in every sci-fi style.
If a GM is not able to maintain balance because of the rulebooks, then either the GM needs to be more discerning about what the characters obtain or they need to balance their scenarios accordingly.
The RAW work just fine IMTU - I'm sorry they do not for yours.
Talon Greyfeather
Banded Mongoose
Last time I looked, Charted Space was not all of the rules, options, and toys any more than the rules, options, toys defined Charted Space.
Everyone screams for them to be separate ... but then cries BROKEN and UNPLAYABLE because if you apply them all they break Charted Space. So are the rules separate from Charted Space or are they not? Does is specify in the rulebook (please provide book and page) where it says that all of that MUST be used for it to be considered Charted Space?
Charted Space is a setting. The Rules, Options, cyberware, expert systems etc. cover more than Charted Space.
We wish they would state that and actually provide guidance as to what does and does not belong in charted space. But they have explicitly not done so, except for a very few things labeled as exotic. And the reality is that most of the time Traveller and Charted Space are used interchangeably. GURPS Traveller = GURPS Charted Space. Same with Traveller20 and Hero Traveller, it was Charted Space with a different ruleset. And now Traveller 5e. It's another Charted Space with a different rules set, but called "Traveller by the Not-Traveller Rules"
So what does and does not belong in Charted Space is left to the individual table, because there is no statement of what is intended to be used (which could be ignored if desired, of course). You are correct that not all the rules in the Core Rulebooks line fit smoothly into the fiction of Charted Space. But there is no such statement in the rules, much less any actual suggestions about what to include or not include if you use that setting.
So what you have is a situation where most of the stuff actually published do not use large chunks of the rules with no explanation as to why not. And that's frustrating. Not because Mongoose's opinion on what belongs is Charted Space is some kind of law that will bind your table, but because it makes the efforts of the many players who like to make stuff with the builder rules and share it not have any consensus on what elements of the rules to actually use when making stuff for Charted Space.
For instance, if you use the full suite of non-exotic options in High Guard, your ships will be ridiculously more efficient than any of the published ships. If your campaign indexes even moderately into cyberware and expert systems, your characters are going to look quite different than the NPCs the published adventures use.
The Traveller Core Rules have (rightfully) grown far beyond Charted Space. But if you come to Traveller in the present day, uninfected by any grognards, you will have absolutely no reason to suspect that Charted Space does not incorporate the entirety of the core rules. So acting like they are obviously separate is disingenuous, imho.
It is my long standing position that Mongoose should get off the fence on one side or the other. Give the players a "These are the techs being used by the authors" guideline for the setting or actually update Charted Space to showcase the full breadth of the current rules.
If "Traveller" is not defined by the rule set (and we have had lots of variations on that) and "Traveller" is not defined by the setting (and we have lots of those as well as Charted Space) then what actually makes the game "Traveller".
I always assumed it was the 2d6 system in space plus the planets defined in the Charted Space setting shown on Travellermap plus any scenario that has been published in those settings plus anything that has appeared in a formally license holders published works (and Yes I know those rules are inconsistent).
Psionics have been part of Traveller canon for years (dare I say generations). If you run a party that all have Psionics then there is nothing in the rules or canon that makes that wrong. There are psionics in Chartered Space (and even in the 3I - they just keep a low profile). If you do however then your game will be massively out of whack and the majority of published scenarios will not present a challenge.
Plasma weapons have been in the game since the get go. Once you have one (and you just need visit a High TL Low Law world with the requisite cash) your combats will become a breeze and you can destroy any threat in a heart beat.
No-one I suspect would argue that the referee has allowed that to occur and any adverse consequences to their game are therefore their responsibility. They will need to introduce mitigations so that not all problems can be solved by fire power for example.
I see no difference in controlling that to controlling things that add DMs. It is the same problem in any game that allows progression. Eventually you need to change the way you are playing. D&D BEMCI recognised this by providing 5 phases of the game differentiated by level. You didn't send 1st level characters into a Companion Level adventure as they would die and you didn't send Companion level adventures into the Keep on the Borderlands as it would be tedious.
If you players have acquired so much bling that they are getting DM6+ then they should be facing the sort of threats that requires that level of advantage. I don't need to roll my drive skill to get to work every day as I have got it down to the point that I need less than 2 on a routine check. The day that lorry dumps it's load on the road in front of me will not be a routine day.
You can't always take your time, you don't always have all your favourite doodads with you, you don't always get to do what you do well or it be routine, sometimes life forces you to do something you suck at.
I always assumed it was the 2d6 system in space plus the planets defined in the Charted Space setting shown on Travellermap plus any scenario that has been published in those settings plus anything that has appeared in a formally license holders published works (and Yes I know those rules are inconsistent).
Psionics have been part of Traveller canon for years (dare I say generations). If you run a party that all have Psionics then there is nothing in the rules or canon that makes that wrong. There are psionics in Chartered Space (and even in the 3I - they just keep a low profile). If you do however then your game will be massively out of whack and the majority of published scenarios will not present a challenge.
Plasma weapons have been in the game since the get go. Once you have one (and you just need visit a High TL Low Law world with the requisite cash) your combats will become a breeze and you can destroy any threat in a heart beat.
No-one I suspect would argue that the referee has allowed that to occur and any adverse consequences to their game are therefore their responsibility. They will need to introduce mitigations so that not all problems can be solved by fire power for example.
I see no difference in controlling that to controlling things that add DMs. It is the same problem in any game that allows progression. Eventually you need to change the way you are playing. D&D BEMCI recognised this by providing 5 phases of the game differentiated by level. You didn't send 1st level characters into a Companion Level adventure as they would die and you didn't send Companion level adventures into the Keep on the Borderlands as it would be tedious.
If you players have acquired so much bling that they are getting DM6+ then they should be facing the sort of threats that requires that level of advantage. I don't need to roll my drive skill to get to work every day as I have got it down to the point that I need less than 2 on a routine check. The day that lorry dumps it's load on the road in front of me will not be a routine day.
You can't always take your time, you don't always have all your favourite doodads with you, you don't always get to do what you do well or it be routine, sometimes life forces you to do something you suck at.
Well, that's the question. But by common usage, I'd say that "Traveller" is actually defined by Charted Space. Because Charted Space is what is in common between all the games called "Traveller", not the rules.
Personally, when I say Traveller, I mean the 2d6 skill based sci fi game. Which, I know, rules out T:NE, T4, and T5 as well as GURPS/HERO/T20 editions of "Traveller". Those other six versions contribute a lot to Charted Space, however.
But my personal definition is certainly not how the brand has been marketed.
OK, so instead of having a detached conversation about the rules you want to adopt that tone. Let's try again.
You have chosen which of the RAW to use and which to ignore. You have, as I explained to you, fixed them! It's not a universal fix: it means changing both the RAW and Charted Space. But you did it!
Your position, as you state it, is:
- You can't use the RAW and should only use a subset of them
- You can't use the default setting as written with the RAW and should remove many options
- The RAW are perfect and the problem lies with any table who can't use them
I hope that I don't need to draw up a formal truth table diagram for you to grasp the teensy flaw in your logic, there.
I'm lucky to be running two successful campaigns right now. No, of course I don't use all of the options in the default rules. Because the RAW don't work if you do. Get it?
- You can't use the RAW and should only use a subset of them
- You can't use the default setting as written with the RAW and should remove many options
- The RAW are perfect and the problem lies with any table who can't use them
I hope that I don't need to draw up a formal truth table diagram for you to grasp the teensy flaw in your logic, there.
I'm lucky to be running two successful campaigns right now. No, of course I don't use all of the options in the default rules. Because the RAW don't work if you do. Get it?
Last edited:
Ok. So what does Charted Space mean?
Do we mean the physical systems defined e.g. on Travellermap (a literal interpretation of the words)? Is the stuff outside what has been "charted" still Traveller? In the beginning very little space was "Charted" and over time (and editions) we have had more sectors and subsectors added. So Charted Space has changed over time and if Charted Space is expandable then any definition of it is mutable. Are there any systems in which Cyberwear is the norm (or could be in some future supplement). If so then Cyberwear is part of Charted Space. That doesn't mean it is ubiquitous in Charted Space and being routinely chromed is still somewhat divergent from the setting. Referee discretion is assumed.
Do we mean the 3I. Is suspect not or The Consulate etc. would not be part of Traveller and they clearly are. Psionics are common in the consulate (or at least in those who might be encountered outside it). There are rules for Travellers having it. It is not however expected that Travellers will routinely have it. Referee discretion is assumed.
Then again is it divorced from the physical space and tied instead into the iconic ships. If you have no Type A or Type S in the game would it be Traveller even if you had all the other trappings of Charted Space? The reason we have so many legacy ships that don't use all the toys in the latest HG is not because of some in-game logic, it is because if you fill the game with new designs people will disconnect from "Traveller". We are constantly reinventing "thousand year old" ship designs because Grognards want the ships to look the same or it isn't Traveller. The rules allow you to create far more efficient designs (and have done for many iterations) but they are still there as place holders for the game.
I am seeing very few people agreeing that the current Traveller RAW are "broken".
There are maybe two or three taking that view (and some being pretty unpleasant about it). Maybe we could have a quick poll to see who thinks the rules are broken and see if a significant number agree and think either things (cyber wear, expert systems etc.) need to be removed from the rules (or labelled as potentially game breaking) because they are too powerful or that we need to throw out the 2d6 mechanic itself as it simply isn't capable of dealing with those things.
We could then move from a position of opinion to consensus.
There are maybe two or three taking that view (and some being pretty unpleasant about it). Maybe we could have a quick poll to see who thinks the rules are broken and see if a significant number agree and think either things (cyber wear, expert systems etc.) need to be removed from the rules (or labelled as potentially game breaking) because they are too powerful or that we need to throw out the 2d6 mechanic itself as it simply isn't capable of dealing with those things.
We could then move from a position of opinion to consensus.
If the rules don't work if used together, they're broken.
That doesn't mean "utterly broken" or "unusable": that's a straw man position a couple of people have argued but it's certainly not my position nor that of the others I have seen.
The rules work well enough for many of us to have a lot of fun if we make house rulings, stress scarcity etc. They also work fine for people who want a more narrative game, and for whom the inability of the core 2D6 system to deal with all of the positive modifiers in the rules is not a problem. This is fine: inspired by Night's Black Agents, I even have a couple of very specific skills that always work for specific characters in very specific situations.
But nobody here, so far, has argued that they work unaltered as written. Everyone who has so far said that they work as written has then gone on to say "you just have to make these changes," each time by removing options that are in the canon for the setting and that are in the rules. I agree! I think MWM, for instance, read Altered Carbon and then thoughtlessly and retroactively changed his own setting with Agent of the Imperium in ways that in turn affect the game. Those changes would be profound and very few people until Chris Griffen in Singularity even tried to work through those profound consequences. And I include MWM himself, there.
PS polls don't decide truth. And sure, on the Mongoose Traveller forum there may just be a teensy presumption that the "everything is great" position might sneak it when you refine the question to an unnatural binary. But plebiscites don't measure anything beyond a snapshot of opinion. There's a reason that Rousseau and John Stuart Mill argued that referendums are a top-down, political weapon and not a neutral democratic instrument!
Just argue your case and come up with a compelling argument as to why "the rules as written work perfectly" and "the rules as written can't all be used or the game breaks" are reconcilable.
Last edited:
Cyberware is absolutely canonical for Charted Space, yes. Not just because it was written in (in AofI) by MWM and MgT built rules upon it, but because - as @Sigtrygg pointed out in a previous thread - the book itself explicitly says up front that its contents comply with canon.
(Obviously, I ignore swathes of it...)
Last edited:
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
You may want to brush up on MongooseMatt's posts...
as it currently stands there are canon Charted Space adventures and supplement that use the tech that breaks the skill system target numbers.
Only because Charted Space under Mongoose now includes all of this system breaking tech, that was not always the case.
That is a... discussion that has been ongoing for nearly fifty years now
Look at the adventures and supplements, they are awash with expert systems, cyberware and the like.
Yes the rules are meant to cover Charted Space and other settings, and once upon a time there was not much in the way of augmentation in the OTU of old.
By adding a +1 here and a +1 there pretty soon you make a 2d6 resolution system with a standard target number of 8+ redundant.
I once again post the probability table:
| Target No. | 2+ | 3+ | 4+ | 5+ | 6+ | 7+ | 8+ | 9+ | 10+ | 11+ | 12+ |
| prob./% | 100 | 97 | 92 | 83 | 72 | 58 | 42 | 28 | 17 | 8 | 2 |
So what do DMs do to your chance of success?
+0 42%
+1 58%,
+2 72%
+3 83%
+4 92%
+5 97%
What is considered a challenge? A 72% chance of success? How about we set the difficulty as 10+... a +3 DM has you succeed 58% of the time, a +4 and you are up to 72%. At +6 you have a 92% chance, and stacking a total DM of +6 is not all that difficult to do.
I will state again this table should be on every character sheet and every referee;s screen.
Yes you can limit the availability of such in your universe, but Matt is on record as stating that all those toys are avialable in Charted Space, and they appear in adventures set in Charted Space.
There are of course other options for the game system itself, a DM cap could be introduced, the standard difficulty could be raised, the type of die could be changed, augmentations could grant their bonus in a different way...
now I am rambling so I will stop.
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
Ahh the good old what is Traveller question. Can't be answered, it is a superposition.
If I use the Traveller 1977 rules, or the current MgT2e to run a game set in a universe I create myself or adapt from a sci fi novel am I playing Traveller?
If I use GURPS, or D&D, or Hero, or BRP, or the GDW d20 house system to run a game set in the Spinward Marches circa 1105 Imperial and then run the Kinunir adventure am I playing Traveller?
As to Charted Space, that is a subtle change to how the OTU is referenced. Even the term OTU causes argument.
The folks at GDW released a set of TTRPG rules for referees to build their own settings, with some built in tropes taken from sci fi literature that influenced MWM. Note we got jump drive rather than warp drive or hyperdrive, but a referee could change that for their universe. We got slug throwers and lasers, not blasters, later plasma and fusion guns (man portable) would be added along with gauss et al.
The fan base wanted an outline of a setting or even a fully realised setting so in LBB:4 the Imperium is mentioned. Then we get A:1 with its library data and the Regina subsector, details contained within would be retconned out of the setting over the coming years.
If you purchase the CT cd/USB drive and the CT JTAS cd/USB drive you will have nearly the totality of material GDW wrote for their setting. You can see how the setting changed over time - study the library data of the early adventures with the library data supplements. You can finf the contradictions and inconsistencies and also blatant omissions.
Rambling again...
If I use the Traveller 1977 rules, or the current MgT2e to run a game set in a universe I create myself or adapt from a sci fi novel am I playing Traveller?
If I use GURPS, or D&D, or Hero, or BRP, or the GDW d20 house system to run a game set in the Spinward Marches circa 1105 Imperial and then run the Kinunir adventure am I playing Traveller?
As to Charted Space, that is a subtle change to how the OTU is referenced. Even the term OTU causes argument.
The folks at GDW released a set of TTRPG rules for referees to build their own settings, with some built in tropes taken from sci fi literature that influenced MWM. Note we got jump drive rather than warp drive or hyperdrive, but a referee could change that for their universe. We got slug throwers and lasers, not blasters, later plasma and fusion guns (man portable) would be added along with gauss et al.
The fan base wanted an outline of a setting or even a fully realised setting so in LBB:4 the Imperium is mentioned. Then we get A:1 with its library data and the Regina subsector, details contained within would be retconned out of the setting over the coming years.
If you purchase the CT cd/USB drive and the CT JTAS cd/USB drive you will have nearly the totality of material GDW wrote for their setting. You can see how the setting changed over time - study the library data of the early adventures with the library data supplements. You can finf the contradictions and inconsistencies and also blatant omissions.
Rambling again...
Limpin Legin
Emperor Mongoose
Great ! It is super seeing these kind of numbers.
Which adventures break the system?
1. Welp ... IK you are talking about OTU ... but science is like that: the formidable task of yesteryear is this years possibility because of inventions and scientific progress.
2. Not all Tech is available on all Worlds even if it/they are "available" in the OTU.
Ditto the (1) above: science will change the perception of what constitutes a challenge. The game should reflect this and I think it does by having a range of Task Numbers. (IMO it should also allow for scientific anomalies that break the rule conventions ... but that is only my opinion on what makes good science-fiction.)
Hope to see it. As an interpretive referee I can do these things anyway. The whole point is to have fun.
Oh !!!? Since when (I hadn't noticed.)
How about "a lineage of sci-fi games, originally conceived by MWM, and now including Mongoose, GURPS, T20, ..."
